Selections of Cassiodorus’ Writings on the Jews

Compiled from the Expositio Psalmorum (tr. P.G. Walsh, ACW vols. 51–53, Paulist Press, 1990–91), the Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita (in Opera Omnia**, ed. Migne, PL 69–70), and the** Variarum Libri XII (in Opera Omnia**). All passages are direct quotations from the scanned or translated texts.**

Preface: The Shape of the Corpus

Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator (c. 485–c. 585), statesman under the Ostrogothic kings and later founder of the monastery of Vivarium, was one of the most learned Latin writers of Late Antiquity. His principal theological work, the Expositio Psalmorum (completed c. 548), is a verse-by-verse allegorical commentary on all 150 Psalms, running to three large volumes in the modern critical edition. Throughout, Cassiodorus reads the Psalter as a continuous prophecy of Christ’s coming, passion, and resurrection—and correspondingly as a running indictment of the jewish people for their rejection, betrayal, and crucifixion of their own Messiah. His Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita, a Latin compilation from the Greek ecclesiastical historians Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomen, and Theodoret, preserves several narratives of jewish hostility to Christians in the post-apostolic era. His Variarum Libri XII, administrative letters drafted on behalf of King Theodoric, includes a letter to the jews of Genua setting legal limits on their Synagogue.

The anti-jewish material in Cassiodorus operates across six registers:

  1. Deicide and collective guilt — the crucifixion as the jews‘ defining crime, attributed to their perfidy, bestial madness, and explicitly demonic instigation.
  2. jews as sons of the devil — Cassiodorus repeatedly applies Christ’s words from John 8:44 to the jewish people as a whole, not merely to the Pharisees addressed in the original dialogue.
  3. Supersessionism — the Synagogue explicitly described as replaced by the Catholic Church; the Mosaic sacrificial law as an obsolete foreshadowing; the jews‘ obstinate adherence to it characterised as foolishness.
  4. jewish perfidy and blindness — the jews‘ refusal to recognise Christ portrayed as wilful, incurable deafness compounded by their possession of the prophetic Scriptures which foretold Him.
  5. jews expelled from the Church’s mission — the apostles’ abandonment of Israel and turn to the Gentiles treated as a providential punishment for jewish obduracy.
  6. jewish violence against Christians — from the Historia Tripartita, narratives of jews crucifying a Christian child and a fraudulent jewish serial convert.

Thirty-two verified passages are presented below, ordered thematically. Each entry includes the direct quotation, the source with psalm number or book/chapter, and a brief note.

I. “The jews‘ Perfidy Is Worthy of Derision” — False Witnesses, the Crucifixion, and the Sealed Tomb

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 2:5 (p. 60)

“The prophet rightly maintains that the jews‘ perfidy is worthy of derision because they tried to set up false witnesses against the truth, they preferred to crucify the Lord of glory, and they stupidly sealed up the burial-chamber of the almighty Christ. So massive, then, are the accumulations of sins on which they are shown to have embarked madly and foolishly against the Lord’s power.”

Note

On the verse “He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh at them, and the Lord shall deride them” (Ps. 2:4), Cassiodorus identifies the object of divine laughter as the jewish people specifically, cataloguing three distinct crimes: suborning false testimony, preferring the crucifixion, and their futile attempt to seal the tomb. The word perfidy (perfidia) is Cassiodorus’s standard epithet for the jews throughout the commentary, carrying the full weight of the Latin legal and theological tradition.

II. “Demented jews“ — The Words of Those Who Sought to Break Christ’s Bonds

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 2:4 (p. 60)

“These words are spoken by demented jews. They spoke of bonds which their sins sought to loose, for they thought that they were bursting these bonds if with wicked purpose they sprang on the Teacher of the law and on His apostles.”

Note

On the verse “Let us break their bonds asunder and cast away their yoke from us” (Ps. 2:3), Cassiodorus assigns these words not to the Gentile nations but specifically to the jews. The epithet demented (dementes) signals that their opposition to Christ was not merely erroneous but a form of spiritual madness.

III. “The Beautiful Texture of This Psalm” — Structure of Psalm 2 as the Rebuke of the jews

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 2, Division (p. 58)

“The beautiful texture of this psalm is fashioned in four sections. In the first, the prophet speaks of the jews in relation to Christ’s passion. In the second come the words of the deranged jews; in the third, the Lord Saviour’s words concerning the all-powerful kingdom and His own indescribable begetting, in so far as our human insignificance can grasp it. In the fourth, the prophet speaks, warning the nations to recognise the Lord’s majesty and to be reconciled to the Christian faith, for unless they grasp the most true teaching of the Catholic religion they know that they will perish, separated from the right path.”

Note

Cassiodorus’s structural analysis of the entire Psalm places the jews — “deranged” — as the second of four speakers. Their voice is represented as insane rebellion against divine order, framed on one side by the prophet’s accusation and on the other by Christ’s proclamation of His own eternal kingship.

IV. “Bestial Madness” — The Aimless Rage of the jewish People

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 2:1 (p. 59)

“Rage is an emotion proper to beasts, and is attributed to men who lose total control and who rejecting reason are fired with bestial madness… We need not be exercised that races and peoples appear to be cited in the plural though the discussion centres on the jews, for we read in the Acts of the Apostles: For of a truth there assembled together in this city against thy holy son whom thou hast anointed, Herod and Pontius Pilate with the nations and peoples of Israel. They pondered vainly because they frequently repeated the divine Scriptures without the fruit of understanding, for in countless places which mention the Lord Saviour it was prophesied that the Messiah would come, but they have been deceived by the greatest of errors, and they believe that He has not yet arrived but is still to come. So it is rightly said that they pondered vainly, because they were totally unable to understand His fruitful coming.”

Note

Cassiodorus on “Why have the races raged?” (Ps. 2:1) explicitly identifies the gentes as a collective reference that centres on the jews, citing Acts 4:27. Their possession of the Scriptures without the fruit of understanding is characterised as a self-inflicted blindness.

V. “The Disloyal jew“ — Evil Repaid for Indescribable Blessings

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 7:5 (p. 101)

“If you ponder these words further, marks of the Lord’s sufferings are revealed, when the disloyal jew repaid evils though he gained continual and indescribable blessings from his Maker.”

Note

On Ps. 7:5 (“If I have rendered to them that repaid me evils”), Cassiodorus shifts from the Davidic literal sense to the christological: the “disloyal jew” who repaid evil for good is the type of the entire jewish people in their relation to their Creator.

VI. “The Unfaithful jew Who Believes He Is Defending the Father” — The Enemy of the Son

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 8:3 (p. 111)

“By the enemy and the defender she specifies particularly the unfaithful jew who believes that he is defending the Father but emerges as an enemy to the Son, as a result of which after appearing to be God’s most conspicuous defender he is exposed as His opponent, for he who does not honour the Son as well does not revere the Father. As Christ Himself says in the gospel: He who honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father who hath sent Him.”

Note

The phrase “the enemy and the defender” from Ps. 8:3 (“that thou mayest destroy the enemy and the defender”) is applied specifically to the jew who uses theological zeal for the Father as cover for enmity toward the Son. Cassiodorus draws on John 5:23 to make the identification structural: rejection of Christ is by definition rejection of God.

VII. “The Wicked Presumption of the jewish People” — Against the Arrest of Christ

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 24:8 (p. 245)

“The prophet asks: Who is the king of glory? in order to condemn the infidelity of the jews. The reply is made… The Lord who is strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle. If you examine this statement, it will be shown to be appropriate to Christ alone. The princes of earth can also be called glorious, but none can be found to be the King of glory save the Highest alone. So to this question, as has already been said, the reply is appended, and here the wicked presumption of the jewish people is well proved by each word. Strong is set against their belief that He could be arrested by swords and clubs. He is mighty whom they consigned as powerless to Pontius Pilate. The additional phrase, mighty in battle, was added so that they should not believe that they had won any victory in their concerted action. In short, when they came to arrest Him, they heard the words: I am he, and on the testimony of the evangelist John all at once fell backwards.”

Note

Cassiodorus reads Ps. 24:8 as a direct anti-jewish polemic: each divine title refutes a specific jewish act — the arrest (strong), the handing to Pilate (mighty), the claimed victory (mighty in battle).

VIII. “A Synagogue of People Shall Surround Thee” — The jewish Persecution of Christ Foretold

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 7:8 (p. 103–104)

“It is as if he were saying: ‘You indeed will come to deliver, but the jewish people will persecute you with lunatic hearts.’ Synagogue here denotes a gathering of wicked men, not a group of religious minds, for if the whole jewish people had believed in Him, they would have received Him before all with devoted hearts.”

And on the same verse:

“Their here refers to the people of the Synagogue, who with rigid habits remained unpledged, and He could not dwell in it since He withdrew himself from its infidelity.”

Note

Cassiodorus explicitly glosses “Synagogue” in its negative occurrence as a “gathering of wicked men.” The persistence of jewish unbelief is attributed not to ignorance but to rigid habits — a willed and obstinate refusal.

IX. “The Poison of Asps Is Under Their Lips” — jews Compared to Obstinate Serpents

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:3 / Rom. 3:13 (p. 152)

“Asps are known to be a monstrous species of serpent. It is said that through their natural obstinacy they do not carry through magicians’ spells, and because they can be softened by no charm they cannot be diverted from their aim. The jews are most aptly compared with this species, for in the face of the words of salvation they have wretchedly affected a fatal deafness, and have chosen to follow poisonous purposes rather than be drawn to practices which bring salvation. So these words seem deservedly to be used of them: They chose darkness in preference to light.”

Note

The classic patristic and Augustinian image of the aspis surda — the deaf asp that stops its ears against the charmer — is applied directly to the jewish people. Their rejection of Christ is characterised as a deliberate, self-willed choice of darkness over light.

X. “Their Feet Are Swift to Shed Blood” — The Murder of the Spotless Lamb

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:3 (p. 152)

“Feet denotes progress in plans by which we proceed from inception to outcome. As for swift, it shows that their plans lacked moderation. To shed blood: understand this of the Lord Saviour, so that the monstrosity of the deed grows with the speed of the operation. So when the blood of the spotless Lamb was shed by the jews, it rendered them most guilty, but when it reached us it consecrated us for blessedness.”

Note

Cassiodorus’s inversion is characteristic: the very blood the jews shed in guilt is the blood that consecrates the Gentiles in blessedness. jewish crime and Christian redemption are set in direct structural opposition.

XI. “The Fool Hath Said in His Heart, There Is No God” — The jewish Denial of Christ’s Divinity

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:1 (p. 150)

“When the jewish people saw that Christ had come in a lowly condition in the flesh which He had assumed, they foolishly said: There is no God. They failed to understand that it was He who had been foretold by the prophets. The sin was the greater because they said it not with the lips but in the heart, so that to their evil utterance was joined the unbelief which was worse.”

Note

Cassiodorus applies the opening verse of Psalm 13 (“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God”) specifically to the jews‘ reaction to the Incarnation. Crucially, he distinguishes internal unbelief — worse — from mere verbal blasphemy.

XII. “That People Was Uniquely Presented with the Gift Which They Sacrilegiously Rejected” — The Failure of the Chosen People

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:2 (p. 151)

“Upon the children of men can be understood of the jews. As the Lord says in the gospel: I was not sent but to the sheep that had been lost of the house of Israel. So with greater honour he called them the children of men, because by contrast with the Gentiles they worshipped one God. As we know, that people was uniquely presented with the gift which they sacrilegiously rejected and made foreign to themselves.”

Note

The singularity and therefore the aggravation of jewish guilt is emphasised: they alone among peoples worshipped the true God, and they alone rejected the Messiah whom their own Scriptures promised.

XIII. “Their Mouth Was Full of Cursing and Bitterness” — The jews Discuss the Lord’s Death

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:3 (p. 152)

“Their mouth was full of cursing and bitterness, when instead of giving useful advice to each other they blasphemed the Lord Christ and discussed His death.”

Note

On the verse “Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness” (citing Rom. 3:14), Cassiodorus gives as his specific referent the jews‘ deliberations over how to kill Christ.

XIV. “They Feared Where There Was No Fear” — The jews‘ False Calculation About Rome

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 13:5 (p. 153)

“The jews said: If we believe in Him, the Romans because of this new cult will take away our place and nation. So it happened that through not fearing the Lord they were afflicted by superfluous apprehensions.”

Note

Cassiodorus cites John 11:48 (the Sanhedrin’s deliberation) as the literal fulfilment of the verse “There they have trembled for fear where there was no fear.” The irony is pointed: by fearing the Romans they provoked the very Roman destruction they sought to avoid.

XV. “The Stiff-Necked jews“ — God’s Sword Threatened Against Those Who Will Not Convert

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 7:13 (p. 106)

“He terrifies the stiff-necked jews who hold the Lord’s law in contempt and enslave themselves to most wicked cults of idols. It is they who are told: Unless you are converted he will brandish his sword, in other words He will send His only Son in shining brightness. By the word brandish is meant the clear effect of alternating light and flickering shadow, which certainly occurred at the Lord Christ’s incarnation, when He revealed darkness to the unfaithful, and the light of His divinity to the faithful.”

Note

The description of the jews as stiff-necked (obstinati) echoes Exodus 32:9 and the entire Deuteronomic tradition of Israelite rebellion. Cassiodorus here employs it as an ongoing characterisation of contemporary jewish unbelief.

XVI. “Totally Demented jewish People” — Who Spurned Christ’s Healing with Accursed Obstinacy

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 35:4 (p. 351)

“This charge is aptly applied also to the totally demented jewish people, to whom the Lord came but who spurned His healing with accursed obstinacy. Pardon is often granted to lack of wisdom, but just vengeance always visits the evil-doing which is deliberate.”

Note

The key distinction here is between culpable and inculpable ignorance. Cassiodorus explicitly rules out ignorance as mitigation: the jewish rejection of Christ was deliberate (voluntate peccant, sinning through the will), and therefore admits no pardon.

XVII. “Many Calves Have Surrounded Me” — The jewish People and Their Leaders as Beasts

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 21:13 (p. 222)

“Many calves are clearly the jewish people, who do not experience God’s yoke, and sport with heedless wantonness. They are also shameless and foolish, for they do not guide their steps with any sense of control, but with wandering and fluid course skip and bound towards wicked designs. By fat bulls He designates the jewish leaders, who like bulls raised their heads high, and puffed out their wickedness and pride, and with savage horns spilt the blood of the guiltless One. The addition of the adjective fat is apt; for that beast becomes exceedingly restless when it bulges with surplus fat, and after being tame it becomes fierce once it is incited with the arrogance of excessive flesh.”

Note

Cassiodorus’s exegesis of Ps. 21:13 deploys a sustained bestiary: the common jewish people are shameless, yoke-refusing calves; their leaders are fat, blood-spilling bulls. The word guiltless (innoxii) placed beside the leaders’ act of spilling His blood makes the moral calculus explicit.

XVIII. “The jews‘ Leaders Are Justly Compared with the Devil” — Sons of Their Father

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 21:14 (p. 173)

“Here, however, it clearly denotes the devil, for the jews‘ leaders are justly compared with him. Under his guidance they raged and were made much worse than he, for whereas the devil tempted the Lord, their cruel madness nailed Him to a cross. The young lion denotes the rest of the jewish people who made themselves sons of the devil. Of them it is said in the gospel: You are of your father the devil. Dwelling in secret places means remaining in ambush, for it is the tendency of execrable men to hide their evil aspirations so that their designs can attain their end by stealth.”

Note

This is one of the most theologically significant passages in the corpus. Cassiodorus applies Christ’s words from John 8:44 (“You are of your father the devil”) not to the Pharisees of the original gospel pericope but to the jewish people in general (caetera Judaica plebs). He also makes the striking claim that the jewish leaders were made much worse than the devil himself, since he only tempted Christ while they crucified Him.

XIX. “Demons Roused and Drove the jewish People” — Satanic Instigation of the Crucifixion

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 16:9 (p. 172)

“By the face of the wicked refers to the demons who roused and drove the jewish people with headlong passion to murder the Lord. Their face was their harsh presence. As the gospel says with reference to Judas: Satan entered into him. So it happened that the jews had sought to snatch away His soul, that is, His life in time, through the instigation of demons. The word surrounded itself expresses the truth of the gospel narrative, for a crowd of madmen encompassed him with swords and clubs.”

Note

Cassiodorus here provides a demonological explanation of the Passion: the jewish people acted at the direct instigation of demons. The language of “headlong passion” (praecipiti furore) removes any suggestion of rational deliberation on the jews‘ part — they were driven by an infernal force.

XX. “Their Stony Hearts Were Not Softened by Miracles” — The Abominable Obduracy of jewish Unbelief

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 21:18 (p. 226)

“There follows the abominable obduracy of jewish unbelief, enabling us to observe that they did not act in a momentary or offhand way. He says rather that they looked and stared, and that their stony hearts were not softened by miracles. Rocks were rent, the earth trembled, the sun hid itself in the garb of darkness so as not to witness so great a crime, yet sadly enough their wickedness remained immovable in its sacrilege, and their eyes unbending.”

Note

The cosmic signs accompanying the crucifixion — the earthquake, the rending of the veil, the eclipse — become in Cassiodorus’s reading a series of miracles specifically designed to soften the jews, and their failure to do so becomes additional evidence of the jews‘ extraordinary obduracy.

XXI. “They Opened Their Mouths: Crucify, Crucify” — The Mad Demand for the Cross

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 21:14 (p. 223)

“By against me He meant in opposition to me, when with odious unanimity they said: Crucify, crucify. Their mouths were truly their own, because wisdom did not open them for the jews, but their own wicked thoughts unbarred them… ravening refers to the lunatic disturbance when they seized and dragged Him to be heard at the judge’s tribunal, and roaring to the blasphemous words with which they cried: Crucify, crucify. In both cases comparison with wild beasts is appropriate, since that mad people squandered a reasonable plan of action.”

Note

The jews‘ cry for crucifixion is framed as an act of bestial lunacy. Cassiodorus draws a pointed contrast: wisdom opens the mouths of the faithful (“O Lord, thou wilt open my lips”), while the jews‘ own wicked thoughts opened their mouths to demand crucifixion.

XXII. “His Blood Be Upon Us and Upon Our Children” — The Curse of Continuing Obstinacy

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 17:41 (p. 191)

“He announces that those who hate Him will be destroyed for continuing in the obstinacy of their infidelity, as is observable in the case of the jews who in wicked tones said: His blood be upon us and upon our children.”

Note

Cassiodorus here cites Matthew 27:25, the jews‘ self-imprecation before Pilate, not as a parenthetical aside but as the defining example of what it means to “continue in the obstinacy of infidelity” and therefore to merit destruction.

XXIII. “The Disloyal jews Were Rejected” — The Gentiles Receive What the jews Forfeited

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 17:44–45 (p. 192)

“Clearly He was delivered from the contradictions of the people when the disloyal jews were rejected, and He was translated to the faith and devotion of the Gentiles. The contradictions refer to the hostility which the criminal mob repeatedly heaped on Him.”

And:

“This praise of the Gentiles is a great rebuke to the jews, for those who did not see still served, and those who did not hear one most sacred word from His mouth none the less listened.”

Note

Supersessionism and its logic are stated here with particular clarity: the Gentiles’ receptivity is explicitly a rebuke to the jews, and jewish rejection is the necessary precondition for the Gentile mission.

XXIV. “Expelled as Sons of Abraham Only in the Flesh” — The Gentiles Receive Abraham’s Promise

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 47:10 (p. 462)

“After the expulsion of the unfaithful jews, sons of Abraham only in the flesh and not by works, He admitted the Gentiles in their fullness to possess the blessedness of the promise which He had made to Abraham and his seed, for though they were not Abraham’s sons by the seed of the flesh, they became such through their holy faith.”

Note

The contrast between fleshly descent and spiritual sonship is the classical Pauline supersessionist argument (Gal. 3–4; Rom. 9). Cassiodorus applies it to the concrete historical act of expulsion: the jews‘ rejection of Christ was the mechanism of their expulsion from the Abrahamic promise.

XXV. “The Sabbath Is the Synagogue“ — The Church Comes Second and Supersedes

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 47 heading (p. 463)

“We must interpret the sabbath as the Synagogue or gathering of the jews which appeared to observe the sabbath. The second of the sabbath is the Catholic Church. So the words of this psalm are assigned to priests for the instruction of the Christian people. There is no doubt that the sons of the cross can be regarded as such, and we know by the clear light of reason that they came second in time after the Synagogue.”

Note

The liturgical heading “at the second of the sabbath” becomes in Cassiodorus’s reading a typological statement of supersession: the Synagogue is the first sabbath, the Church the second and greater. The word rational (ratione perspicua) signals that this succession is not a matter of revelation alone but of clear theological logic.

XXVI. “The Synagogue Set Beneath the Law Has Sinned” — The Church Succeeds It

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 50:20 (p. 509)

“He begs that since the Synagogue, set beneath the Law, has sinned, Sion, the Catholic Church, which succeeds it may by Christ’s grace be strengthened.”

Note

Cassiodorus’s gloss on “Deal favourably, O Lord, in thy good-will with Sion” (Ps. 50:20) makes the typological succession explicit and causal: it is because the Synagogue sinned that the Church succeeds it. The Church’s strengthening is the direct consequence of the Synagogue‘s failure.

XXVII. “Abandon the jews‘ Most Lunatic Superstitions” — Direct Address to the Church

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 44:11 (p. 448)

“Forget thy people, he said; in other words, abandon and regard as foreign to your spirit the pagans’ assemblies or the jews‘ most lunatic superstitions.”

Note

On “Forget thy people and the house of thy father” (Ps. 44:11) addressed to the Church as bride of Christ, Cassiodorus gives a bipartite gloss: the pagans and the jews. The jews‘ practices are characterised as superstitiones insanissimae — “most lunatic superstitions” — a stronger phrase than the one applied to pagans (“assemblies”).

XXVIII. “Why, You jews, Do You Still Act Foolishly?” — Direct Apostrophe at the Conclusion of Psalm 49

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Conclusion of Ps. 49 (p. 492)

“This would be a most profitable psalm if only the jews‘ wickedness were willing to recognise it. Initially it discussed the incarnation of the Lord. Further, the Saviour himself warns that His devoted people must abandon cattle as sacrificial victims, and discharge the sacrifices of the heart; and He forbade the sinner who did not believe in Christ to proclaim the Godhead. Next He records the nature of the sacrifice of praise which is to be offered. Finally, He revealed how the sinner is to be judged. Why, you jews, do you still act foolishly? Why do you not fear your own death? Listen to the Synagogue as she proclaims the Lord’s incarnation and the future Judgment. Believe that He whose coming was foretold has already been seen. The remedies which you seek are not far off. The next psalm absolves you, if you hasten to the rewards of repentance. Why do you cut yourselves off from the universal remedy? That which frees us saves you too. Let us say together: Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy great mercy. Seek baptism, take the flesh which you crucified, drink the blood which you shed. A holy confession can absolve the sin which unholy prayers clearly committed.”

Note

This extraordinary passage — one of the few in the Expositio where Cassiodorus directly addresses the jews in the second person — is a combination of rebuke, theological indictment (“take the flesh which you crucified, drink the blood which you shed”), and an appeal to conversion through baptism. The phrase “the jews‘ wickedness” (iniquitas Judaeorum) in the opening sentence frames what follows as both condemnation and exhortation.

XXIX. “Unbelieving jew“ — Direct Challenge on Psalm 40 and the Synagogue

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 40:10 (p. 403)

“Do you hear, unbelieving jew, him who was once your prophet harmonizing with our gospel? You would continue to support him by acknowledging that the Lord Christ has now come, if your heart was not cloaked in a noxious cloud.”

Note

Cassiodorus’s direct address to “the unbelieving jew” (Judaeus incredulus) in the second person, on the verse “I have not concealed thy mercy and thy truth in the crowded Synagogue,” is a characteristic moment of exegetical apostrophe. The image of the heart cloaked in a noxious cloud (noxia nube obvoluto) is drawn from the tradition of jewish caecitas mentis — spiritual blindness as a veil over the heart (2 Cor. 3:15).

XXX. “jew, Since You Do Not Have Your Own Sacrifices” — The Obsolescence of the Mosaic Cult

Source: Expositio Psalmorum, Ps. 39:7 (p. 402)

“jew, since you do not have your own sacrifices, whom do you await in your beguiled state? He has now come. That Word has been made flesh. He has filled the world with His preaching that brings salvation. But you are still dreaming some strange dream in your bed. What further do you seek? Why are you lost in amazement? In this Book of Psalms He says that in the head of the book it is written of Him, so you must believe that the blessed One has already come. His life as it is now befallen is clearly set down. Where are those who realise that they do not have the sacrifices promised here? Since they do not have this statement in their sacred books, they are appropriately silent, speechless at the words which confront them.”

Note

Cassiodorus addresses the jew directly on the fact that the Temple sacrifices have ceased, interpreting their absence as proof that the Messiah has already come and that the Mosaic cult has been fulfilled and superseded. The phrase “dreaming some strange dream in your bed” (in lecto tuo somnium extraneam somnias) characterises jewish messianic expectation as a self-induced delusion.

XXXI. “jews Acting Illicitly Against Christians” — A Child Crucified in Mockery

Source: Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita, Lib. XI, Cap. XIII (citing Socrates Scholasticus)

“Post paucum itaque tempus, Judaei rorfus illicite contra Christianos agentes, puniti sunt in loco, qui dicitur Mcstar, polito inter Chalcidem, & Antiochiam Syriae. Hic itaque Judaei conflicta quaedam risibilia celebrantes, per Christum derogare coeperunt deridentes Cruci, & spernineo, qui est crucifixus habentibus. Comprehendentes igitur infantulum Christianum, atligatum Cruci suspenderunt. Et primum quidem deludebant, & irridebant ei: postea vero correpti vesania, ipsum infantulum verberibus peremerunt. Ob hoc ergo dira congreffio inter eos, atque Christianos exorta est. Quod dum Princeps agnovisset, provinciarum Judicibus mandatum est, ut hujusmodi quae terentur auctores, punirentur. Et hoc modo dignam ultionem suae nequitiae receperunt.”

Translation:

“Shortly thereafter, the jews acting illicitly once more against Christians were punished in a place called Mcstar, situated between Chalcis and Antioch in Syria. Here the jews, celebrating certain mock games, began to deride Christ, mocking the Cross and those who worship Him who was crucified. Seizing therefore a Christian child, they suspended him bound to a cross. And at first they mocked and jeered at him; but afterwards, seized with madness, they beat the child to death. On this account a fierce conflict arose between them and the Christians. When the Emperor learnt of this, he commanded the judges of the provinces that the authors of such deeds be punished. And in this manner they received a punishment worthy of their wickedness.”

Note

This passage, compiled by Cassiodorus from Socrates Scholasticus’s Historia Ecclesiastica, records what the compiler presents as a jewish ritual mockery of the crucifixion enacted on a living Christian child. The caption heading in the original reads Quomodo Judaei praesumptionis suae poenas exciverint — “How the jews brought punishment upon themselves for their presumption.”

XXXII. “A jewish Deceiver Repeatedly Baptized for Money” — The Fraudulent Convert

Source: Historia Ecclesiastica Tripartita, Lib. XI, Cap. XIV (citing Socrates Scholasticus)

“Ea fiquidem tempestate Judaeus quidam seductor, ficta Christianitate crebro baptizabatur, & hac arte pecunias congregabat. Cumque multis haeresibus illufisset Arianorum, atque Macedonianorum, postremo ad Ecclesiam venit Orthodoxorum. Cui dum tempus jejuniorum fuisset impositum, multisque adhuc diebus occuparetur, coepit festinare, ut quasi in ferventi studio baptismatis dona perciperet… Cumque fons fuisset impletus, deducitur Judaeus ad baptizandum. Tunc Dei quaedam invisibilis virtus aquam disparere praecepit… Et denuo deducto Judaeo aqua disparuit.”

Translation:

“At that time a certain jew, a deceiver, was repeatedly baptized under a feigned Christianity, and by this art gathered money. Having mocked many heresies — those of the Arians and of the Macedonians — he finally came to the Church of the Orthodox. When a period of fasting was imposed on him, and still many days remained, he began to hurry so that he might as if in fervent zeal receive the gifts of baptism… When the font was filled, the jew was led forward to be baptized. Then a certain invisible power of God caused the water to disappear… And when the jew was led forward again, the water disappeared once more.”

Note

The heading of this chapter in the original reads De Judaeo, qui cum saepe baptizaretur, aqua fontis abscessit — “Of the jew who when often baptized, the baptismal water receded.” Cassiodorus preserves this miracle narrative, drawn from Socrates, as evidence that divine power itself refused to admit a jew whose conversion was fraudulent and motivated by avarice. The episode combines the charge of jewish deception with the theology of an unbaptisable nature.

XXXIII. “Permitted to Repair Their Synagogue but Not to Enlarge It” — The Legal Limits of jewish Presence

Source: Variarum Libri XII, II.27 — Theodoricus Rex Universis Judaeis Genuarconfistentibus (composed by Cassiodorus on behalf of Theodoric the Great)

“Permittit quidem illis Synagogam rificete, non vero ampliare, dummodo tamen tricentualis non obstet praescriptio.”

“Sicut exorati justum cupimus praebere consensum: ita per nostra beneficia fraudes fieri legibus non amamus; in ea parte praecipue, in qua divinae reverentiae credimus interesse. Ne ergo insultare videantur elati… Quid appetitis, quae refugere debereretis? Damus liquidem permissum, sed errantium votum laudabiliter improbamus. Religionem imperare non possumus: quia nemo cogitur, ut credat invitus.”

Translation:

“He permits them indeed to repair their Synagogue, but not to enlarge it, provided that the prescription of thirty years does not stand in the way.”

“As when supplicated we desire to give a just response, so we do not love that frauds should be committed against the laws through our benefices; particularly in that matter in which we believe the reverence of the divine to be at stake. Let them not therefore appear to insult in their elation… What do you seek that you ought rather to flee? We give permission indeed, but we laudably condemn the desire of those who err. We cannot command religion, for no one is compelled to believe against his will.”

Note

This letter, drafted by Cassiodorus as Quaestor for Theodoric’s chancery, is the government’s response to a petition from the jews of Genua regarding their Synagogue. It permits repair but expressly forbids enlargement or ornamentation, citing the precedent of imperial legislation and the concern that tolerated jews should not appear to “insult” Christianity by expanding their buildings. The formula Religionem imperare non possumus — “we cannot command religion” — is often cited as evidence of Theodoric’s relative tolerance, but its context is a document that explicitly frames jewish practice as errantium votum (“the desire of those who err”).

Sources